Pinard,
J.
[Translation]:—
By
judgment
dated
July
24,
1986
the
defendant
was
ordered
to
pay
the
plaintiff
the
sum
of
$291,301.05
with
interest
and
costs.
This
judgment
was
appealed,
and
in
its
application
the
defendant
asked
that
execution
be
stayed
until
the
appeal
was
finally
disposed
of.
Counsel
for
the
defendant
based
their
application
on
section
50
of
the
Federal
Court
Act
and
Rules
1213(b)
and
1909
of
this
Court.
As
I
have
already
had
occasion
to
observe
in
Baxter
Travenol
Laboratories
of
Canada
Limited
et
al.
v.
Cutter
(Canada)
Ltd.,
[1984]
2
C.P.R.
(3d)
142,
the
decision
to
allow
an
application
to
stay
execution
of
a
judgment,
the
principle
of
which
is
stated
in
section
50
of
the
Act,
is
a
matter
which
is
left
entirely
in
the
discretion
of
the
court
in
accordance
with
the
circumstances
of
the
particular
case
and
in
keeping
with
the
two
rules
mentioned.
The
burden
on
the
applicant
to
show
the
existence
of
special
circumstances
to
justify
the
making
of
a
stay
order
is
heavier
when
the
judgment
or
order
are
not
in
themselves
the
kind
which
can
be
the
subject
of
a
stay
order.
In
this
connection
Marceau,
J.
said
the
following
in
Antares
Shipping
Corporation
v.
The
Ship
Capricorn,
alias
the
Ship
Alliance
and
Its
Owners,
[1976]
2
F.C.
367:
I
am
of
the
opinion
that
Rule
1213
may
be
applied
only
in
the
case
of
an
enforceable
judgment
in
the
true
meaning
of
this
expression
.
.
.
The
judgment
at
issue
in
the
case
at
bar
is
such
an
executory
judgment,
which
has
been
appealed,
and
Rule
1213
accordingly
applies:
1213.
Execution
of
judgment
appealed
against
shall
be
stayed
pending
the
disposition
of
the
appeal
upon
the
appellant
(a)
giving
security
satisfactory
to
the
respondent
that,
if
the
judgment
or
any
part
thereof
is
affirmed,
the
appellant
will
satisfy
the
judgment
as
affirmed,
or
(b)
giving
such
security
and
doing
such
other
acts
and
things
as
are
required
by
order
of
the
Trial
Division
to
ensure
that,
if
the
judgment
or
any
part
thereof
is
affirmed,
the
judgment
as
affirmed
will
be
satisfied.
In
my
opinion
a
stay
of
execution
in
the
case
at
bar
would
not
cause
any
irreversible
damage
to
anyone,
if
the
following
conditions
are
met:
(1)
if
the
examination
after
judgment
already
ordered,
should
it
not
yet
have
been
made,
can
still
take
place,
together
with
any
other
examinations
of
the
same
type
that
may
result
therefrom;
(2)
if
the
defendant
provides
security
to
ensure
that,
if
the
judgment
appealed
against
or
any
part
thereof
is
affirmed,
the
judgment
will
be
satisfied
as
affirmed;
such
security
to
be
given
within
30
days
of
service
of
the
stay
order,
to
cover
the
full
amount
of
the
judgment
appealed
against,
including
capital,
interest
and
costs,
and
to
be
such
as
will
satisfy
the
plaintiff;
otherwise,
to
consist
of
a
bond
in
accordance
with
Rule
314(b);
(3)
if
the
order
is
made
subject
to
review,
in
particular
if
the
defendant
should
fail
to
proceed
promptly
with
its
appeal;
(4)
if
the
defendant
pays
the
costs
of
the
application
at
bar
forthwith
within
15
days
of
their
being
taxed.
In
the
circumstances,
the
very
nature
of
the
judgment
a
quo
justifies
the
Court
in
granting
a
stay
of
execution
on
the
foregoing
conditions.
So
ordered.
Order
accordingly.
Email this Content